skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>Companies learned that helping their customers shoot themselves in the foot can come back to bite them, even if it was all legal and what customers wanted at the time.

What a dismissive, awful, terrible way to phrase this.

Having parents that were nearly the victims of one of those upside down mortgages, it's not that simple. They didn't ask for a 400k mortgage. They asked for a home they could afford. When the bank, that they have trusted their entire life, says, 'you can afford this much per month', they had no reason to question that.

They're unsophisticated people, who trusted the system not to fuck them. And that's precisely what it tried to do.

While I get that people need to take control of their own money, when the people responsible for looking after your money, the actual, literal bank tells you you're good, why wouldn't you believe them?
I'm sorry did you just call one of the Trump kids a politician?
See for example:

Robert H. Jack, Tony Stockman, and Andrew McPherson. 2016. Effect of latency on performer interaction and subjective quality assessment of a digital musical instrument. In Proceedings of the Audio Mostly 2016 (AM '16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 116–123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/2986416.2986428

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=13472622195552899...
You should be able initiate an ACATS transfer out of your Robinhood account from another brokerage. https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/index.php . https://robinhood.com/us/en/support/articles/transfer-stocks...

I don't mean to recommend IB as opposed to other brokerages in the current moment, I pasted their link because I transferred an account into IB in this way several months ago so I know it works.
I wear Khadi in the name of civil disobedience against fashion :)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2156064/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khadi
Lmao I laughed so hard. "You can resign" XD
I'm pretty sure that Boston Globe's "Spotlight" have heard such opinions many times
Robinhood experienced several outages in March 2020 because of large volumes of trading.

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/09/robinhood-app-down-again-dur...
> E2E is all in the clients

But only mobile clients, no E2E on the desktop or for groups sadly.
Sure, it's regulated, but which regulation states they have a fiduciary duty to you?

Given they are currently arguing in court they have no such duty, but only to act in their customers best interest, perhaps this isn't sufficiently clear to them.
Piracy: Does It Matter?
Do those vehicles have the same steering rack as a normal street car? I was under the impression the wheels go less than 360 degrees from lock to lock so hand over hand isn't a concern.
>Here is an F1 racing wheel - used in some of the highest (not lowest) performance driving.

It's worth remembering that an F1 racing car is not road legal and are not driven in traffic.

I've personally never seen someone pull out of a parking space in an F1 single-seater.
We have laws about scams and etc, is that elitism, or just that the population doesn't want scams?
I really appreciate Jack Goldstone’s perspective on this.

Instead of perpetual UBI, he’s in favor of a larger single lump sum paid out after a period of time post-civil service. The idea being instead of the slow morphine drip of $1k a month for life, you can get, say, $25k-$50k in a lump sum after serving a year or two in the Peace Corps, AmeriCorps etc.

The advantage being service builds a stronger sense of community and gives you more skin in the game. Additionally, a larger single lump sum is more conducive to helping start a business as well as being cheaper long term. It parallels the GI Bill in a lot of aspects.
Until you get in conflict with Microsoft's friends like Google or the Go team for just wanting a more readable font and them starting a diffamation campaign against you.
I was on Github for 7 years.
Then I dared to not accept a no for an answer.
The Go team made sure I was "flagged" with no ability to delete my account.
The move away from github cost about 1500€ in time and because the account was flagged I had to provide credentials for EACH of the over 120 repositories I had there.
I never talked to anyone with a name, only devsup or other fake named people.
To this day the account isn't deleted, despite me telling them to delete it multiple times.
When you hover over an @ mention the profile is visible.
I have written to a GDPR watcher who only replied that their EU office was in the Netherlands and that they're an US company.

So apparently the EUGDPR doesn't mean shit when you're Microsoft.

This corrupt system is pissing me off.

This also made me delete all my accounts associated with Microsoft, like LinkedIn etc.
Microsoft is evil and so is Google.
They need to be broken up into smaller parts. They have too much power.

What also happened was Google then actively went after my adsense earnings. All of a sudden I received warnings and sites being deactivated for monetization.
The webmaster console also started showing errors and my sites were delisted!

Because I didn't take no for an answer when Ian Lance Taylor spoke the verdict of God on the documentation needing a more readable font?

Fuck github and Microsoft and Google
I agree. The ultimate irony is that their mission is to democratize finance.
Yesterday they were cherished, today they are tarnished. Good luck on that IPO, Robinhood.
Agreed, a financial collapse is not good, and I’m not arguing in favor of it. My point is that, at least for this crisis, most people (and probably the economy as a whole too), would have been better off if the government had given money only to individuals. People would have then “voted with their pockets” and the money would have circulated according to what people needed, boosting the economy “organically”.

As a side note, as it has been painfully obvious this past year, the stock market is not the economy - however, it seemed like the government focused on saving the stock market instead of the economy.
Naive question: Could it be that it gets less responsive the faster the car gets?
Unfortunately there is no real alternative to RH, not one which makes buying options so easy.

RH is counting on that, that only a small percentage of users will leave them.
Yup. Publicly employers are stating how important children are and that they're fully understanding. No doubt in the board room it's a bit more like "stupid children distracting our employees. This needs fixing"
Robinhood could put a margin freeze on trading these stocks on margin or borrowing against shares of GME. It would protect them and be fair to retail investors.
I had a stroke and had to add a steering to wheel knob spinner at the 11:00 position in order to drive safely. That looks to be impossible with this design.
No you really can't. The right to refuse service gets weird with trading platforms because if you're found to be doing because you're trying to influence the market then you're in hot water.

Can you imagine a trading platform just outright refusing to process your orders because it was better for them?
There’s a better answer in this thread, but a tl;dr/eli5, is that if all I can do is buy a stock then the only information available in the price are the people who believe in the stock/bond (usually as a proxy for belief in the company). This means that all the people who believe the stock/bond is no good have no way to lend their belief to the price of the stock/bond. This represents an optimistic asymmetry in the stock/bond price. By having the ability to short, some of the asymmetry is removed thus making the price better able to reflect the future expected value of stock/bond. That’s what makes it “more efficient”.
https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/l6yrs3/we_a...
In real world you often have to choose between evils. It's utopian slippery slope, yes, but in a current world I prefer to give big corps more power over my data than governments.
That's quite an extrapolation from what is likely to be a statistically insignificant number of data points.

If you interacted with a vast majority (including the majority that doesn't post on internet forums) of Tesla owners, this extrapolation might be valid. But I really feel like it's safe to assume that you don't.
reini has a ... unique ... perspective on perl development, which is probably related to how he got banned from the p5p mailing list for repeatedly calling people incompetent without giving actual technical reasons against the patches.

cperl is an interesting fork with a lot of good ideas, but his tendency to submit patches to core modules to work around cperl bugs without full explanation and then yell at the people asking for justification and actual tests for those changes meant that such patches don't tend to actually end up applied.

Given reini is undeniably brilliant when at his best, I consider this deeply unfortunate, but I've tried to explain the concept of "even if you're sure you're right, you need to actually convince people of that" multiple times both online and in person and apparently not got through, so at this point I can only suggest that people who're interested in his brilliance follow their code for themselves and submit the interesting stuff as patches.

A great shame, but things are what they are.
Their motivation does not matter. The point is that effectively they are a single coherent entity.

Assuming no bad intentions doesn’t change the outcome of their actions.
I hope that works for some people, but it is too much like: "I've buried the heroine in a box in the backyard." It is too easy to dig it back up.
use a better broker! dont be a mark
All Against Robinhood
I thought M1s SIMD throughput was lower?
> Why should Robinhood pick a winner (siding against their own customers)?

They're not siding against their customers. The median Robinhood trader that buys in at $350 is going to be left holding the bag when the price drops back down to $10. You can argue whether or not the paternalism is good or bad, but this is obviously going to on net stop more people from losing money than making money.
I am talking about a solution to separating employers from your choice of insurance policy, you're talking about an entirely different issue.

I said there are other, arguably better, solutions (e.g. universal coverage) whereas this is an attempt to solve a near-term issue of employer provided health insurance.

If you can get the political support to pass universal reform to health coverage in the US, then absolutely do that instead. In the current political climate this compromise is still a vast improvement.
>I think the point is, how can we make it so the companies that build profitable products using open source code can support the developers who build those open source libraries?

This. This is the conversation we need to have.

However, I doubt that a public company on the USA stock exchanges -- which by definition is concerned with a Capitalist maximization of shareholder value, can rely on donations.

They need to be able to return venture capital money at a multiple. So, why did they take the cash in the first place? So that they can build a company to govern and employ the team members and build expertise to fund the R&D needed to build the product and support customers.

It seems unfair to me that a company with deep resources chooses to fork and modify instead of investing in the company and owning a stake to help influence the roadmap and/or enter into a resale / partnership model for monetization.

It's a tough scenario and it needs to be discussed.
Tesla should simply have to demonstrate that their whole package is safer than other cars being sold (including mustangs and corvettes with zero visibility, terrible handling etc etc).

This idea that you can stick a round wheel in some of these terrible sports cars and hypercars and it makes them safe is the height of stupidity. It's the whole package, traction control, safety cage, crumple zones, emergency braking etc.
A TOS isn't law. What Robinhood did altered the market price of several major stocks including AMC and BB. They will almost certainly be getting yet another SEC investigation.

Being free doesn't allow you to commit crimes.
An app called Robinhood, named after the archetype of a man who took from the rich and gave to the poor, now blocking people from taking from the rich. I hope the irony is not lost on the general public. Robinhood needs to rebrand and/or fix their internal mission statement.
Plenty of American brokerages have not imposed any restrictions either, and again, a brokerage is not an exchange and it is important to know the difference if you are going to be a self-directed investor.
> Even if I have to sign over all my rights of the code

Even if people sign over the rights, there can still be admin to prove that they have those rights to sign over in the first place, or the responsibility for any fall-out if it turns out they didn't later, which some will not want to take on.

Also, some projects are personal and while the authors are perfectly happy to share they want to keep their version theirs, as in entirely created by them. People release their code open source for a variety of reasons, sometimes contributions back in that manner are not actually desired and we shouldn't take offence at that (it isn't intended to raise offence).

> ought to be made very clear in README.md or CONTRIBUTING.md or something too

This is a large part of the answer, I'd agree with you there.

The default assumption on github, and more generally, is that contributions are likely to be welcome and in fact actively desired. Politely explaining that this isn't the case in obvious places removes the confusion (and if someone hasn't read the usual places before submitting the PR that is their mistake not something to blame the project owner for). A sentence or two of text, as seen in the example that started this thread, in the README or similar documentation, should be sufficient. Perhaps also add it to the LICENSE file if you think that is more likely to be checked than someone reading the whole of the README (though if the readme is long enough for that to be a significant issue, perhaps look to streamline it and move some detail off to supplementary files).
Perhaps an army of those inflatable flappy bois would be effective in defending a fixed position against an onslaught of low altitude drones?
Not trying to defend Robinhood here, but it would probably go like this: Robinhood is a private service and potentially has liability from what it enables users to do. They are under no obligation to provide trades on specific stocks, and if users want to trade that specific stock then they are free to use a different service. Users can sell/trade their assets out of the Robinhood service if they are unhappy with the current state of affairs.

Of course, the users are free to file any lawsuits they wish. Saying "the game is rigged and its unfair" isn't exactly a legal argument, though.
Does that mean that a friend using Telegram can import the history between her and me from WhatsApp even if I'm not using Telegram?

If yes this is just horrible, I don't want to have my data on Telegram servers without my permissions.
> The reason nobody uses Usenet is that unmoderated newsgroups were taken over by nazis and trolls

Some of the sci.* hierachy was taken over by the mentally ill and crackpots. They aren't hateful or intentionally trolling with their insistent claims that they have discovered free energy, come up with new insights into the evolution of human language, etc., but the effect on fruitful discussion was much the same.
Maybe this would work for simple websites. But for web apps, it's a hard pass for me. For context, I write a web-based POS application, and waiting for a network request on every micro interaction is a no-go.

There are lots of other problems with this approach that could be solved, but aren't immediately obvious, such as (similar to React) over-rendering. If someone has their focus in an input within the frame that gets swapped out, they're going to lose their focus. This has implications for accessibility as well as just regular usability.
For those who want to read the filing/follow along with the case but don't have access to PACER (which is where the docket link in the tweet leads), CourtListener's RECAP archive [0] has this case listed already [1], and a kind soul has already uploaded this particular filing [2]. Hopefully, as the case develops, people with PACER access will continue to buy and contribute the filings to RECAP.

[0] https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/
[1] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/50143052/nelson-v-robin...
[2] https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.553175...
I don't know. If they had restricted sales I think that would be much worse. That particular pattern is the only pattern that could exist in practice.
I can walk into any gas station in the country and blow as much money as I care to on lottery tickets. I can drive to Las Vegas and walk into a casino and do practically anything I want with my money. This is America and retail investors are (hopefully) all legal age and are participating of their own free will.

Hedge funds have treated the stock market like their own personal casino for decades. When the house starts to lose at their own game, due to their own greed, it's suddenly a problem?
> actual peaceful protestors

They killed a Police Officer, chanted "Hang Pence", and tried to stop the democratic process of verifying votes for the new president.

Now of course you will likely argue that they were a small minority, but I don't see you making that concession for those on the "other side" so I'm not sure how much weight it'll have.
This feels like a watershed moment in corporate-political-consumer relations. We didn't know there was an instance when censorship could unite people like this. There's now a clear red line for corporations regarding what censorship is acceptable, something which didn't exist before.
So just disable the margin trading instead of blocking all Buys?
> The art of dictatorship is strange, and requires much better understanding than just "evil takes over private ownership".

Also, dictators have no need to own anything (at least domestically). They already have the power, so what do they gain by "owning" something they already control? IMHO, private property/ownership is really only a useful concept when you have to allocate control among legally-equal(ish) peers.

I think a lot of people really only understand their own place in their own society, and a lot of time they end up just projecting that onto some other situation when it doesn't really apply.
I agree. I feel like there's a VERY important needle to thread here about what people mean by saying they "want to work from home".

And that sentiment might also change post-COVID.

I also wonder what this means for people who aren't in the best situation to work remotely.
A lot like AWS Systems Manager, it seems.
> The ultimate irony is that their mission is to demon-atize finance.

The above is what I read at first glance which seemed appropriate.
I think the problem for Robinhood here is that their decision has effectively dampened the upward mobility of the stock, which hurts option holders (because IV goes down) and long holders (because the stock can't go up as much).

So in a way, Robinhood is hurting all the people with existing long-delta and long-vega positions. Many of those people are Robinhood's own customers.

I guess Robinhood would have to demonstrate that the position isn't suitable for its customers, or that they couldn't guarantee orderly execution under the stress of a continued barrage of orders and new customer sign-ups.

This limitation definitely has an impact on GME stock, which is not good for RH because their own customers are largely the people who lose.

You can put whatever you want in your TOS, but if you lose money for your own customers and one of your investors (Ken Griffin) is on the other side of the trade, then you have a huge problem on your hands.
Ah, so the quick explanation is how many bins per unit time does the line hit (how many pixels in a vertical stack). If the line is horizontal and hits one bin, then it should have a weight of 1. If it's steep and hits 3 or 5 bins, then the weight should be 1/3 or 1/5 for each bin-pixel.

That makes sense. Thanks!
> Nobody is advising people buying lottery tickets

That's demonstrably false. There are literal ads on TV that show how wealthy you can become if you just buy a lottery ticket.

> that they should borrow money to buy as many of them as possible because they will make a nice easy profit

You clearly haven't read any of the GME threads on WSB. Pretty much everyone is saying to only invest what you can afford to lose. Most people are buying small amounts just to f##k with the hedge funds, and they are outspoken about it.

> but at least people playing don't think they're doing arbitrage.

Buying a lottery ticket for a dollar, hoping they make much more? Isn't that the whole point of a lottery?

> And governments often do restrict other forms of gambling associated with more problematic losses.

That's the whole point of the criticism that you're missing. These restrictions are completely arbitrary and don't follow any rules.

You can go to a casino and lose your life savings.

You can buy 1 million lottery tickets and lose your life savings.

You can buy one of thousands of penny stocks and lose your life savings.

The government won't stop you. The brokers won't stop you.

But suddenly, when a big hedge fund is caught with their pants down, people like you come out and pretend like what's happening is a big problem, and we have to stop the trading "because some people can lose money".

Sorry, I'm not buying your narrative at all.
I agree, all approaches to this have some kind of major drawback. The main pain point with the approach chosen by qutebrowser is probably missing support for WebExtensions (i.e. Chrome/Firefox extensions), though I still hope that'll change with QtWebEngine some day: https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-61676

Other similar projects are using WebKitGTK, or indeed Electron: https://vieb.dev/ - again, probably not better/worse than QtWebEngine, just a different set of problems.

qutebrowser actually has an abstraction layer over the backend (which is why it can support QtWebEngine and the older/outdated QtWebKit, with little effort needed to keep support for the latter). If there is some new kind of library appearing some day which can draw to a Qt window and used from Python, it'd totally be possible to add support for it to qutebrowser without too much effort.

I had hoped for Servo to fill that gap at some point, but so far that hasn't happened yet: https://github.com/servo/servo/issues/27579

Another possibility is for Geckoview to be ported to Desktop platforms some day: https://mozilla.github.io/geckoview/ - something the people behind Tridactyl would like to happen: https://tridactyl.xyz/ideas/#port-geckoview-to-x86_64

As for extensions - other replies to your comment already mention this, but the main problem is that the WebExtension API is very constrained. On top of that, there's no API for handling keyboard input, so those extensions work by injecting JavaScript code handling keyboard inputs into every page you visit. That works, but only barely - lots of hacks are required for those kind of WebExtension limitations, and they won't work on pages where Mozilla decides extensions can't inject JS (such as internal pages or the Mozilla addons page). Again the folks behind Tridactyl have some ideas on how to improve the situation, but so far this hasn't happened yet: https://tridactyl.xyz/ideas/#write-a-keyboard-api-for-firefo...
Nope.

The current "war" is between complete re-invention and essentially the status quo. This is neither of those, therefore it upsets both sides, and gets squished by "perfect is the enemy of good."